Pak-China ties changing? Reality check!

[Sergi]

Hmm.. i can't understand what you are trying to say here. I think you meant region level right? But he was ready for some compromises and Congress party stood its ground on a governance where the center would have more power.



Well tell me, can any indian go and buy land in J&K? Why should there be a six year state government there? What i mean by autonomy is the implementation of article 370 in J&K.
"Jammu and Kashmir is the only state in India which enjoys special autonomy under Article 370 of the Constitution of India according to which, no law enacted by the Parliament of India, except for those in the field of defence, communication and foreign policy, will be extendable in Jammu and Kashmir unless it is ratified by the state legislature of Jammu and Kashmir. " [Source :Wikipedia]. Whether we agree / disagree in minor details, we are ready to go the extra mile to retain J&K. We could have done the same in 1947.

Religion not Region. Typo may be. He was ready for compromise ??? Give me any reference I will agree. The is a book on partition by British author. I don't remember name. It has few letters between Gandhi and jinha. I know Indian author will not be taken as source for this matter. It's really not good thing to talk this subject here. You can search for Jinhas "14 points". You will get idea

Your defination of minor details gona hurt you kidding
JK enjoys a little extra autonomy than other states. I think it's not 6 years it's 5 years now. Even the State head is renamed as Governer now.
Article 370 has made these things possible. It was in agreement. India honour its world. JK person can buy land in rest of India.
No one not India or Pak can agree on Kashmir issue in favour of other nation. It will create unrest in particular countries.
Many people blame Congress and Mr. Patel for partition. But if you read the unbaised literature you will find what I say

 

[ksgokul]

Religion not Region. Typo may be. He was ready for compromise ??? Give me any reference I will agree.

Devil's Advocate :: Jaswant Singh :art-I:: 2/4 :: 1947 Partition :: Nehru, Jinnah both responsible - YouTube. If possible hear the complete interview. In a secular nation like India, Hindus have a role to play - reassure minorities that their interests are protected. All Jinnah expected was that kind of an assurance. Today when a communal event occurs in Gujarat, Hindus raise their voices against the government inaction. So muslims in India are more assured now. Back in 1947, Muslims were powerful till the decline of Mughals, then British had no reason to show partiality for Hindus. At the cross roads of independence, Muslims were afraid of the Hindu majority, because of the few communal voices. They wanted some kind of assurance through the legislation that would protect their interests. Look at the amount of bloodshed, we have incurred after independence. Do you think it is worth the non-compromising position?

Your defination of minor details gona hurt you kidding
JK enjoys a little extra autonomy than other states. I think it's not 6 years it's 5 years now. Even the State head is renamed as Governer now.
Article 370 has made these things possible. It was in agreement. India honour its world. JK person can buy land in rest of India.
No one not India or Pak can agree on Kashmir issue in favour of other nation. It will create unrest in particular countries.
Many people blame Congress and Mr. Patel for partition. But if you read the unbaised literature you will find what I say

We should not blame individuals. We should have had a comprehensive mechanism through legislation to show that the Muslim interests will be protected in an Independent India. Ideally the failure rests on Congress party, but then no one else did come close, so the blame rests on everyone of us.

 

[Sugarcane]

I already posted it year ago and posting again for Pakistan

Here is an old story

A business executive was deep in debt and could see no way out. Creditors were closing in on him. Suppliers were demanding payment. He sat on the park bench , head in hands, wondering if anything could save his company from bankruptcy.

Suddenly an old man appeared before him. “I can see that something is troubling you,” he said. After listening to the executive’s woes, the old man said, “I believe I can help you.” He asked the man his name, wrote out a check, and pushed it into his hand saying, “Take this money. Meet me here exactly one year from today, and you can pay me back at that time.” Then he turned and disappeared as quickly as he had come.

The business executive saw in his hand a check for $500,000, signed by John D. Rockefeller, then one of the richest men in the world! “I can erase my money worries in an instant!” he realized. But instead, the executive decided to put the un-cashed check in his safe. Just knowing it was there might give him the strength to work out a way to save his business, he thought.

With renewed optimism, he negotiated better deals and extended terms of payment. He closed several big sales. Within a few months, he was out of debt and making money once again. Exactly one year later, he returned to the park with the un-cashed check. At the agreed-upon time, the old man appeared.

But just as the executive was about to hand back the check and share his success story, a nurse came running up and grabbed the old man. “I’m so glad I caught him!” she cried. “I hope he hasn’t been bothering you. He’s always escaping from the rest home and telling people he’s John D. Rockefeller. ” And she led the old man away by the arm.

The astonished executive just stood there, stunned. All year long he’d been wheeling and dealing, buying and selling, convinced he had half a million dollars behind him.

Suddenly, he realized that it wasn’t the money, real or imagined, that had turned his life around.It was his new found self-confidence that gave him the power to achieve anything he went after.

This story have a critical lesson for Pakistan, Pakistan must think China as 500,000$ check and put it in safe for moral support and we as nation have to work hard to stand on our feet and to become a proud nation, friend and partner.

 

[ksgokul]

I already posted it year ago and posting again for Pakistan

Here is an old story

This story have a critical lesson for Pakistan, Pakistan must think China as 500,000$ check and put it in safe for moral support and we as nation have to work hard to stand on our feet and to become a proud nation, friend and partner.

That was really a nice story.

 

[Sergi]

Nice story. Like it.

 

[Developereo]

The ambassador is right and wrong.

Yes, Pakistan is plagued with clueless leadership resulting in problems with extremism, economy, etc.

Yes, China will continually recalculate the risk/reward ratio of the Pakistani relationship, just as they (and everyone else) does for every other relationship.

However, he is also wrong on a couple of fronts. Nationalism and belligerence are not becoming passe. On the contrary, both traits are on the rise around the world, including in India, China, ASEAN and the West. Where this will lead, only time will tell.

But he is right that Pakistan must get its act together and present China with a strong partner able to add value to the relationship. He is also right that the window is closing.

The only solution I see right now is the Imran Khan way. He is not God and he won't solve everything, but it is a step in the right direction.

 

[Sergi]

Devil's Advocate :: Jaswant Singh :art-I:: 2/4 :: 1947 Partition :: Nehru, Jinnah both responsible - YouTube. If possible hear the complete interview. In a secular nation like India, Hindus have a role to play - reassure minorities that their interests are protected. All Jinnah expected was that kind of an assurance. Today when a communal event occurs in Gujarat, Hindus raise their voices against the government inaction. So muslims in India are more assured now. Back in 1947, Muslims were powerful till the decline of Mughals, then British had no reason to show partiality for Hindus. At the cross roads of independence, Muslims were afraid of the Hindu majority, because of the few communal voices. They wanted some kind of assurance through the legislation that would protect their interests. Look at the amount of bloodshed, we have incurred after independence. Do you think it is worth the non-compromising position?



We should not blame individuals. We should have had a comprehensive mechanism through legislation to show that the Muslim interests will be protected in an Independent India. Ideally the failure rests on Congress party, but then no one else did come close, so the blame rests on everyone of us.

Whom I blame ???
Plus if you are really interested on this topic open a new thread. I already got infractions for off topic comment. Trust me that thread will be more fight than discussion. In democracy with Fnudamental Rights and protection for FRs is instituted then there is no need for separate arrangement. This separate arrangement for one minority spook others. And it cause more trouble than solution.
Hindu Muslim communal problem is lot older than India Pak. Mughals lost their power to Maraths. And Marathas lost their power in Panipat. So their was no opposition to Brithish when they start occupying.
Comprehensive mechanism through legislation ??? Remember Hindu Code bill ??? I dare any party to talk about Muslim Code bill. All political parties have seen what happen when Hindu code bill was passed.
Solution to this problem is accept coexistence. You try to make rule people got threatened

 

[Developereo]

This story have a critical lesson for Pakistan, Pakistan must think China as 500,000$ check and put it in safe for moral support and we as nation have to work hard to stand on our feet and to become a proud nation, friend and partner.

But the ambassador makes a crucial observation: Pakistani leadership hasn't got the faintest clue or qualifications on how to run a country, let alone chart a course to becoming a powerhouse. The govt. basically muddles along on foreign aid and brute inertia.

As long as we have these self-serving, infighting, clueless feudals dominating the political field, it is illogical to expect that anything will change. Look at how these imbeciles still haven't managed to get Gwadar running and linked up to China.

 

[JanjaWeed]

A realistic analysis by Zafar Hilaly.. he has been pretty much consistant with his views on Pakistan's current status in great game of intl geo politics. However he seems to hold back his views when exposed to intl audience.

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

The ambassador is right and wrong.

Yes, Pakistan is plagued with clueless leadership resulting in problems with extremism, economy, etc.

Yes, China will continually recalculate the risk/reward ratio of the Pakistani relationship, just as they (and everyone else) does for every other relationship.

However, he is also wrong on a couple of fronts. Nationalism and belligerence are not becoming passe. On the contrary, both traits are on the rise around the world, including in India, China, ASEAN and the West. Where this will lead, only time will tell.

But he is right that Pakistan must get its act together and present China with a strong partner able to add value to the relationship. He is also right that the window is closing.

The only solution I see right now is the Imran Khan way. He is not God and he won't solve everything, but it is a step in the right direction.

I agree with you in latter part.
Nationalism is not passe, infact in Asia it is on rise. Look at Iran, India, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Pakistan even Afghanistan, nationalism is definitely on rise.

 

[Sunnny]

its truth that pakistan is most isolated now and isolation may increase after 2014 after nato withdrawal
Look at the pakistani actions,strongly appeasing russians even.This shows desperation

 

[lem34]

I think he is too pessimistic. He exaggerates the threats to our relationship with China, he underplays our use and need to China. He makes some good points.

It doesn't need a genius to see we have crap leadership.

This does not lead to the conclusion that we make peace with India on Indian terms.

 

[IND151]

very good article

 

[Sunnny]

I think he is too pessimistic. He exaggerates the threats to our relationship with China, he underplays our use and need to China. He makes some good points.

It doesn't need a genius to see we have crap leadership.

This does not lead to the conclusion that we make peace with India on Indian terms.

 

[ksgokul]

Whom I blame ???
Plus if you are really interested on this topic open a new thread. I already got infractions for off topic comment. Trust me that thread will be more fight than discussion. In democracy with Fnudamental Rights and protection for FRs is instituted then there is no need for separate arrangement. This separate arrangement for one minority spook others. And it cause more trouble than solution.
Hindu Muslim communal problem is lot older than India Pak. Mughals lost their power to Maraths. And Marathas lost their power in Panipat. So their was no opposition to Brithish when they start occupying.
Comprehensive mechanism through legislation ??? Remember Hindu Code bill ??? I dare any party to talk about Muslim Code bill. All political parties have seen what happen when Hindu code bill was passed.
Solution to this problem is accept coexistence. You try to make rule people got threatened

My point was simple. If we have to stick such stance, we should give up J&K. Why can't we expect them to accept peaceful co-existence? We are also thinking about autonomy for Assam. So reality has been quite different.